Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11

    Thanks

    As we did from the control room to FD. Aha. Thanks.

  2. #12
    The idea is to have two seperate mixes from the same board. One for the stage monitors (the pre-fader aux sends) and one for the mains (the faders). You would do this if you don't have a monitor pit with its own board. The bigger boards will have a talkback feature to communicate with the stage through the monitors.

    If I use aux sends for fx sends I use pres (also pre-eq)and return to a spare channel. That keeps the input to the fx dependant on the channel inputs rather than the channel outputs, and I can control the whole fx mix seperately with it's own fader. More stable and convenient.

    The only time I believe I ever used post-fader aux sends live was to control additional amp racks powering speakers in sections off to the side or somewhere that aren't normally used.
    'I think my intimate relationship with electronics started as a child when I was playing with a screwdriver and a wall plug, Doc, and...'

  3. #13
    post-fader aux sends are useful to drive in-ear monitors in live productions for mix-minus, setting everything you want the talent to hear to union and things you don't want them to hear to -inf [as well as mix-plus, setting union on what you want to add to pre-fader and everything else as post]
    Eric Adler (tonsofpcs)
    http://www.videoproductionsupport.com/ Chat at: http://tinyurl.com/vpschat
    Follow me on twitter: @videosupport @eric_adler

  4. #14
    Quote
    Quote: penniesfromheaven
    View Post
    The idea is to have two seperate mixes from the same board. One for the stage monitors (the pre-fader aux sends) and one for the mains (the faders). You would do this if you don't have a monitor pit with its own board. The bigger boards will have a talkback feature to communicate with the stage through the monitors.

    If I use aux sends for fx sends I use pres (also pre-eq)and return to a spare channel. That keeps the input to the fx dependant on the channel inputs rather than the channel outputs, and I can control the whole fx mix seperately with it's own fader. More stable and convenient.

    The only time I believe I ever used post-fader aux sends live was to control additional amp racks powering speakers in sections off to the side or somewhere that aren't normally used.


    Ok, I understand that much, now why would you have more than one?

  5. #15
    Not sure what you're asking, Ivan. More than one what? Mix?
    'I think my intimate relationship with electronics started as a child when I was playing with a screwdriver and a wall plug, Doc, and...'

  6. #16
    Quote
    Quote: penniesfromheaven
    View Post
    Not sure what you're asking, Ivan. More than one what? Mix?

    No, why is their more than one prefade per channel?

  7. #17
    Oh. so you can send out more than one mix. Say you have the main mix, a simple monitor mix which you send to the monitor amp, and you also want to run everybody thru a digital delay, but not all at the same level. You can use a second aux bus for that. Then say you want to record to a CD recorder. You could use a 3rd aux bus for that, since you wouldn't want the live mix for it. This as a basic small club/church scenario, with only one board to do-it-all. My church gets 11+ different mixes out of 4 different boards this way.
    'I think my intimate relationship with electronics started as a child when I was playing with a screwdriver and a wall plug, Doc, and...'

  8. #18
    Quote
    Quote: tonsofpcs
    View Post
    post-fader aux sends are useful to drive in-ear monitors in live productions for mix-minus, setting everything you want the talent to hear to union and things you don't want them to hear to -inf [as well as mix-plus, setting union on what you want to add to pre-fader and everything else as post]
    Yep, and it works rather well from an FOH engineer's viewpoint, but having been on the talent end of it, it sucks. I didn't like hearing all the little tweeks made throughout the show, and if a FOH mistake is made it can affect my performance, where with a separate in-ear mix altogether I won't notice it.
    'I think my intimate relationship with electronics started as a child when I was playing with a screwdriver and a wall plug, Doc, and...'

  9. #19
    Quote
    Quote: penniesfromheaven
    View Post
    Oh. so you can send out more than one mix. Say you have the main mix, a simple monitor mix which you send to the monitor amp, and you also want to run everybody thru a digital delay, but not all at the same level. You can use a second aux bus for that. Then say you want to record to a CD recorder. You could use a 3rd aux bus for that, since you wouldn't want the live mix for it. This as a basic small club/church scenario, with only one board to do-it-all. My church gets 11+ different mixes out of 4 different boards this way.

    Hmm. Thanks.

  10. #20
    Quote
    Quote: penniesfromheaven
    View Post
    Yep, and it works rather well from an FOH engineer's viewpoint, but having been on the talent end of it, it sucks. I didn't like hearing all the little tweeks made throughout the show, and if a FOH mistake is made it can affect my performance, where with a separate in-ear mix altogether I won't notice it.
    Not sure what you're going for here, if you're in a situation where you're cramped and need to run monitors from the main mix, the FOH Engineer should be able to easily maintain levels and keep the talent mixed out (so they don't hear echos) and possibly mix in a cue channel....
    Eric Adler (tonsofpcs)
    http://www.videoproductionsupport.com/ Chat at: http://tinyurl.com/vpschat
    Follow me on twitter: @videosupport @eric_adler

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Subscribe to us on YouTube